"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:JnsSj.3365$1b7.2487@newssvr13.news.prodigy.ne t...
> Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>> [While not really directly related to the topic at hand, I'm sorry- I'm
>> just too weak-willed to pass a up a slight jab at the iPhone: at the very
>> BOTTOM of the reasons to switch carriers was "the desire for a specific
>> phone (3%)." It does help explain, however, why carriers don't seem to
>> be
>> negatively impacted by lousy handset selections.]
>
> What makes you think they're not impacted? If Verizon were able to offer
> the plethora of handset choices enjoyed by the GSM community, they'd
> probably be increasing their lead over AT&T at a greater rate than they
> are now.
Again, if only 3% switch because they want a particular handset, it stands
to reason that people generally choose a carrier first, and phone second.
Ergo, the actual handsets offered matter very little. (Also reflected in
carriers advertising- the actual handsets are usually just tagged on the end
of the ad proclaiming the value of the network/fewer dropped calls/cheap
monthly rate/texting package, etc.)
> Also, the RCR survey was about why people switch carriers, but what they
> should have looked at is why people stick with a carrier. Look at the big
> difference in churn rates, where Verizon has always enjoyed a significant
> advantage.
The best of a field of bad numbers- even Verizon's stellar (by comparison)
churn percentage still means 1 out of every 7 or 8 customers bolt each year.
Hardly a number to be proud of (again, except by comparison.)
|